The Senators warn that, “Because of existing provisions within the Clean Air Act and others embedded in the Paris Agreement, remaining in it would subject the United States to significant litigation risk that could upend your Administration’s ability to fulfill its goal of rescinding the Clean Power Plan. Accordingly, we strongly encourage you to make a clean break from the Paris Agreement.”

“Leading environmental attorneys have been candid that they intend to use the Paris Agreement and the existing endangerment finding to force EPA to regulate under Section 115 of the Clean Air Act.”

Today the Fourth Circuit Court of Appeals upheld a prohibition on the President’s ban on travel from nations he considers terrorist risks. The federal judiciary has proven its willingness to thwart the President’s executive authority with a heavy hand.

Making a “clean break” from the Paris Agreement is the sure-fire way to prevent the courts from doing the same to thwart the President’s energy policy.

Excellent suggestion by over 25% of Senate.
The US should not do anything re so-called climate change that requires legislation. Although carbon dioxide does bring about green house effect, the Earth reacts to changes in retention of radiation by multiple mechanisms (currents, sea life, presence of dissoleved iron in water, upwelling of deep ocean water and distribution of moisture), nearly all of which are inmodellable as turbulent interaction. The 19 or so independent math models upon which sure climatic predictions of huge statistical variance are based, do not take these into account. This is because there exists NO reliable theory/model of these chaotic factors.
We should finance research to create such theory/models not attempt to control what is undoubtedly uncontrollable withowithout them. Finally it is not even evident that a comprehensive model of such chaotic interacting processes exists or if it does is computable.
The co-opting of climate change/control by political means is the modern day equivalent of alchemy, made more dangerous by arrogant yet ignorant faith in useless “curve fitting” mathematical/statistical models of near zero predictive ability.